Improving the quality of feedback through the use of electronic

Improving the quality of feedback
through the use of electronic marking
– a journey.
Maureen Readle, Jak Radice, Neil McKeown
Centre for Educational Development
University of Bradford
An eMarking Journey
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2
Background issues.
University of Bradford policies.
Present practices.
Development of eFeedback and eMarking
Experience of eMarking
Issues encountered
The way forward?
Background issues
• How to improve the
quality of feedback?
• Why isn’t feedback
valued?
NSS 2012
Feedback on my work has been prompt
I have received detailed comments on my work
3
64%
63%
University Policies
Policies that affect assessment and marking:
• Anonymous marking.
• 20 day turnaround time for completion of
marking process.
• Electronic submission of coursework.
• Typed feedback.
Drivers for eMarking
4
Marking and Feedback
• Emphasis on summative assessment
marked anonymously.
• Some good practice related to formative
feedback.
5
Development of eFeedback
No consistent policy or approach:
• Audio feedback.
• Word comments.
– Returned via Blackboard or email.
• TurnitinUK GradeMark:
– Ad hoc by individual academics.
6
Development of eMarking
Development of stand alone whole-school
approaches:
• SOM, SCIM, EDT;
• Web-based assessment criteria grids /
rubrics.
• Outside institutional framework, e.g.
– Not integrated with centrally-supported tools
such as VLE
7
Development of eMarking
Development of whole-school approaches
using centrally supported tools:
TurnitinUK GradeMark:
• QuickMarks:
– Trialled with SOHS‘s IPE module;
– Use by 2 Schools + lecturers in other schools.
• Rubric:
– Qualitative rubric [one school].
8
eMarking Requirements include
•
•
•
•
Anonymous marking.
On-line and off-line marking.
Rubric (assessment criteria).
Comments:
– In text;
– About each criteria;
– General comments.
• Second marking / moderation;
– Blind double marking.
•
•
•
•
9
Audit trail for External Examiner.
Check for unoriginal content.
Marking process hidden from students.
Spell checker.
etc. etc.
Implementation:
TurnitinUK GradeMark
1. Trialled with IPE module (2010-11):
– School of Health Studies interdisciplinary
module;
– 145 3rd year students.
2. Whole of School of Health Studies (201112)
– With Anonymous Marking feature used.
10
Students’ Experience of Using
TurnitinUK
… you can use that
positive criticism towards
hopefully getting a better
mark …
… if you look at your
feedback you are able to
make improvements and
see where you are failing
or not doing so well …
… it makes a difference,
knowing specifically
where you went wrong…
11
… You can see exactly
what you did well and
where you didn’t do so well
…when you next come to
write an essay …you’ve
learnt from previous
attempts …
… that was really good, just
one click, mark, feedback,
done, that was it…
… You can submit it
anytime you like…
Staff Experience of Using
TurnitinUK [1]
… I always feel I always
have to justify the mark I
award them …
… You have to justify
the mark that you’ve
given, through your
feedback, so that
students can
understand how to
improve …
12
… provides us as
lecturers with an ‘aide
memoire’ … when the
students come and
challenge us…
… I did find it quite
easy to annotate the
script using this
system so I did a bit
more …
Staff Experience of Using
TurnitinUK [2]
… I didn’t tend to use
[QuickMark] … it’s not
personal, it’s not valuable
to the student because it’s
not about their work, it’s
about academic work
generally…
…you get more insight
into how other people are
marking because you can
see their comments …
13
… there are certain
things that I find myself
saying over and over
again to the students,
but if I find myself
writing [a QuickMark]
then I’d save it in my list
so I could use it again
and again …
…we can second mark
it very quickly …
Blackboard Rubrics
Development of whole-school approaches:
Blackboard interactive rubrics:
• 2012-13:
– Used by 1 school (School of Health Studies).
– One module’s coursework marked and
moderated.
• Staff generally positive about:
– Ease-of-use of rubrics;
– Speed of marking;
– Rubric features (spell checker!).
14
Issues Encountered
• Drivers:
– University policies relating to the administration of
assessment;
– Not centred on pedagogy.
• eMarking exposes flexible processes and
practices relating to manual submission.
• Requires a change to attitude and practice:
– Health & safety fears.
• Learning curve.
• Technical, including:
– Staff digital literacy or lack of!
– Off-line anonymous marking.
15
Way forward?
Proposal for the University:
• Formative personalised feedback in advance
of summative assessment.
• Summative assessment marked anonymously
against assessment criteria with general
comments.
16
Question time
[email protected][email protected]
17